Sol:

We asked the question about Jewish law to better understand where you are coming from. Most ethicists and physicians have a different take. They believe that there is no ethical difference between the decision to connect (or not) a feeding tube and the decision to withdraw it. This does not make Jewish law or your position wrong.

When the feeding tube was hooked up, there may have been some hope of recovery but now there's no hope or at least much less hope. So, when conditions change, maybe the decision should change, too.

So, it sounds like you are objecting to the removal of feeding tubes in general on religous grounds and, in addition, in Terry's case because her husband is such a "vance". Maybe you're right.

On the subject of "starvation", that word is very emotionally charged and perhaps should not be used in this case. It implies suffering and this patient probably cannot suffer. But, as long as the tube is connected, she will live and when it's withdrawn she will die.

Bev and Jerry